Doing a tournament rating in World of Tanks is a terrible idea that is doomed to fail. If I remember right, WGA tried that a few years ago and it was a huge failure, since any such rating just doesn't work for the kind of team-based tournaments that WoT uses. It's an especially poor idea when there are a large number of WoT tournaments with no entry fee and no real prize, meaning that intentional manipulation of rating can be achieved if there's a reason to do so. As far as I can tell, all this rating system seems to be doing is punishing players that want to start doing tournaments, since if you're going from just playing in pub games or clan stuff and want to start doing tournaments, you're going to get stuck in a tournament bracket where the prizes aren't worth the effort. That seems quite poor if you want to grow the playerbase.

And god help you all if you're trying to use ELO again. There are many reasons why Magic the Gathering stopped using ELO.

I'm not saying they should be participation rewards. I'm saying, like the dozens of tournaments that gave out Type 59s before, everyone should have an equal chance of winning the Type 59. It shouldn't be limited to the top like 5% of the server. That's what crap like Bronze/Silver/Gold league is for.

Sadly Bronze and Silver League in their previous forms does not exist anymore, another misstep by WG among a long list of missteps these past few months.

Starting this season there is now only open series and gold league, open series doesn't give out rewards like the previous leagues used to, only thing that can be gained is a chance for a spot in gold league.

Sadly Bronze and Silver League in their previous forms does not exist anymore, another misstep by WG among a long list of missteps these past few months.

Starting this season there is now only open series and gold league, open series doesn't give out rewards like the previous leagues used to, only thing that can be gained is a chance for a spot in gold league.

Wasn't aware they gutted Bronze/Silver that much as well.

There is pretty much no reason to even play tanks anymore. CW is crap. Tournaments are crap. Pubs are crap because nothing is being done about artillery.

OK....So I went to GOSU. I am trying to find anything that relates to a "rating". My team of clan people have pretty "low" personal ratings but we play a lot of tournaments. Does this mean we are "pro's" and go on to the top ranking even though compared to most we are not so good? Can we decide to build two teams and structure them for different brackets? If we can do this where can we see our ranking and points so that we can decide how we structure our teams so that the brand new guys don't get the crap steamrolled out of them. We are getting new players in by showing them they do nbot have to start out being the best but to try and you get something. Then they get better.

The issue is that yeah, everyone wants a Type 59, but with a format like this, the same people keep winning a Type 59 over and over and over again. The Zombie points for a tournament like this should determine the teams that get the physical prizes and points earned in groups should determine the tank prizes.

Everyone does not want a type 59 because that ship has sailed with power creep.

There is pretty much no reason to even play tanks anymore. CW is crap. Tournaments are crap. Pubs are crap because nothing is being done about artillery.

WG is CLUELESS.

In a recent interview they said they could not nerf arty alpha because teams would not be able to dig out a hull down IS7. I mean, WG could not be more clueless.

How do you deal with a hulldown IS7 when u have not arty?

UMMMM, flank it????????

I just cant imagine WG being this STUPID. All WG needs to do is cut arty alpha by 30%, cap it at 6 per game and if they stack up in the que then play another class of tank, reduce the arc and kill the view range so arty sitting bush cant outspot lights and with those 4 very easy fixes arty is tolerable, but WG is paralyzed and just want to milk as much money out of the game before they turn the servers off without making any major changes to it.

If Teams are going to be based on Rankings, I think there should be an accessible Tournament Ranking Page somewhere for WG. If we want to build a team to try and reach a specific prize, it would be helpful to know what we are starting with. There is no individual ranking on Gostat. There is no Tourney ranking in Clantools. There is no tourney ranking in WG. Does the person who played 10 battles and won 1st place every time rank higher than the person who played 100 battles but only placed 20th? What is weighted more, placement or activity? Does Clan league battles/Clan tourneys Count? Even a list of players current rankings would help for team building. When building a team it would be helpful to know what rankings you are going to need for the prize you want to try for. I am not the strongest players but I tend to play with much stronger players, I would not want to stop them from potentially trying for a better prize just because of my numbers. Please provide us with our rankings.

Each player has a rating based solely on tournament battles. The rating does not include random battles, team battles, clan wars or strongholds.

The system tracks tournament participation from March 2016 to the present. Any tournaments before March 2016 are not counted.

I don't think I've played any tournaments since March, so does that mean I have no chance at getting a headset if I join this tournament?

Yes, you have played in tournaments since March

Exigaet, on Sep 26 2016 - 18:27, said:

If my understanding of the rules is correct, "Standard" and "New" teams have no chance of winning the Type 59 which I think is pretty dumb. I've been doing tournaments for over two years and I don't think I'd qualify for the "Premium" teams which means I'd be bumped down to "Standard" and only be able to earn 32 total points. So because I'm not a super unicum and can't do well in every single tournament, I have no chance of a Type 59.

Couple of things to hopefully clear up confusion.

1. It will be harder for teams in the Standard group to earn as many points; however, harder isn't the same as impossible. It partly depends on if teams can win consistently at different tiers and the final number of participants - more unique participants means more players are in the top 1% at the end.

This also isn't the first time that we've run a tournament where the overall prize is skewed towards one group.

2. The top 1/3 of teams won't be all super unicum teams; they should all be highly competitive teams. Also, more teams participating in each tournament means more teams are in the Premium group.

azriel000, on Sep 26 2016 - 20:48, said:

2 Questions:
-Can you post the formula for this new rating system?
-Is there a chance to see our rating in-game or somewhere before the tourny starts?

1. No, at this time the exact formula will not be posted. It was already mentioned that players will try to "game" the system.

2. Unfortunately, right now we don't have a way to show the ratings.

Thambry, on Sep 26 2016 - 22:18, said:

the whole thing is not worth the trouble as only the top 5 of each group win something - unlike before where (for example) the top 50% win something. Depending on how many teams sign in, its useless to participate unless you play exceptionally well.
A badly thought through event that favours experts but does not motivate new/inexperienced players. Another fail, WG!

I would argue that 5 out of 10 teams winning gold in each group still means that 50% of the players will win something.

Compared to random group creation, this is actually a bit more fair to newer/inexperienced teams. With random groups, a new team is just as likely to end up in a group with all experience/superunicum teams as they are to end up in a group with other new or inexperienced teams. People generally don't have fun getting beat up on by other teams all the time; one of the biggest complaints I've heard is that they wished there was some sort of a ranking system for teams.

Using a rating system, teams are matched with other teams that are around their rating level, providing a theoretically more balanced group. New teams are introduced to tournaments by playing against other new teams and, because teams are generally more balanced, should have a fair shot at earning some gold.

Chillsau, on Sep 26 2016 - 23:53, said:

Doing a tournament rating in World of Tanks is a terrible idea that is doomed to fail. If I remember right, WGA tried that a few years ago and it was a huge failure, since any such rating just doesn't work for the kind of team-based tournaments that WoT uses. It's an especially poor idea when there are a large number of WoT tournaments with no entry fee and no real prize, meaning that intentional manipulation of rating can be achieved if there's a reason to do so. As far as I can tell, all this rating system seems to be doing is punishing players that want to start doing tournaments, since if you're going from just playing in pub games or clan stuff and want to start doing tournaments, you're going to get stuck in a tournament bracket where the prizes aren't worth the effort. That seems quite poor if you want to grow the playerbase.

And god help you all if you're trying to use ELO again. There are many reasons why Magic the Gathering stopped using ELO.

Several years ago, before I started working at WG, there was an ELO system for tournament teams. If I recall correctly, it actually worked pretty well and my team enjoyed it until it was removed. This system, however, is not an ELO system.

I believe what you are referring to was when we used a modified Swiss-system, which did not work very well based on how we tried to implement it. That wasn't actually a rating system that persists across tournaments, which is what this is intended to be.

The idea behind using a rating system to organize teams into groups/leagues/ladders is not new. Doing well in tournaments allows you to increase your rating and earn better prizes while facing teams around your level.

New teams will temporarily be in the New Team group and yes, for this specific tournament, they will receive lower gold amounts. However, that doesn't mean that in any/all future tournaments, the prizes will be lower for the newer teams.

Another mouse trap to weed out the hacks that wont get used. Good way to keep a sharp axe.......never use it. Log in and out after one battle. Flying around a corner on the move and get one shot killed by a gold aimbot - with more then half life left. Those marks on your barrel was earned, yup.

Unique paint or tank art as a reward goes much further then a fist full of coins. I would like to keep my cola war Pepsi theme graphics as a winning prize. World needs haters and bling does that.

Need some future events to be more a lotto win thing instead of rewarding those with the mom's cellar life. Another trap for the inactive log bots. Even in Pokémon a new player has a chance at the unique and rare. Ya Pokémon sigils on turrets, not.

Here is another example of rating sorting. Just as in the MM the use of gold rounds should factor in as where your seated. Pay 2 Win. Use a crutch in team fights, earn less points. Use a crutch in a tier 6 tank and always be looking down the barrel at 6 and higher tanks in random fighting.

I guess I will try it first and see how it goes. I am trying to be positive but I miss the old days when we had 3 or 4 tourney's in a single day and there was always something to do or get ready for. The average player always had a good chance at winning gold as long as they had a plan. Currently, we get excited about a tournament then we do nothing for 2 days etc/repeat.

the whole thing is not worth the trouble as only the top 5 of each group win something - unlike before where (for example) the top 50% win something. Depending on how many teams sign in, its useless to participate unless you play exceptionally well.
A badly thought through event that favours experts but does not motivate new/inexperienced players. Another fail, WG!

What? Are you saying you expect gold payouts for losing most of your matches in a given group? That's not how any tournament has ever worked, except in grade school where they give out participation ribbons. The gold payouts are fair, the valid complaint here is that the top division teams are going to win most of the tanks regardless of record simply because they will get more tickets on average. A new team winning every group gets the same number of tickets as a top division team coming in 5th. It simply doesn't make any sense to have a shared prize pool with a distribution like that.

Reply to this topic

HTML mode is enabled. The rich text editor is not available while HTML is enabled. You may lose some formatting when you deselect HTML mode and switch back to the rich text editor.

For security reasons, please do not provide your personal data or the personal data of a third party here because we might be unable to protect such data in accordance with the Wargaming Privacy Policy.